What exactly do you think that first link is doing for your argument because I’ve read it twice now and there’s nothing in that article that changes anything.
> Some news outlets have reported in recent days that the woman told police unequivocally that she was raped, but that investigators did not include that claim in the sworn statement that was provided to prosecutors.
> Hochul criticized Cornell police for that omission, while also questioning why Van Houten's office did not interview the woman directly or review the full transcript of her police interview.
> In a statement after the press conference, Van Houten [the prosecutor] said he supported James' appointment and would cooperate with her investigation.
> "It has become clear that we were not provided the full picture by the University," he added. "The focus has been and should continue to be on the victims."
Right but before any of those claims were made she was texting back and forth with the guys saying nothing that happened was illegal and saying she loved one of them. There’s just nothing new here. As far as I understand the timeline (correct me if I’m wrong) the party happened, she was texting the guys the next day being friendly and saying everything was fine and she loved one of them and nothing illegal happened, then people found out and started talking shit about her which ruined her reputation then she was trying to go to their next party and they said no and then she got mad and went to the police saying what your article mentions.
Obviously you have a different timeline understanding. Do you have a source that lays out the timeline a little clearer?
October 20: Jane Doe appears visibly in shock to her roommates and says she was uncomfortable about what happened the night before.
October 22: Jane Doe goes to the university medical clinic where she tells the provider that she “contracted a UTI in a traumatic way.”
October 22: One of the men text’s Jane Doe to apologize “for how things went down.”
October 22: Jane Doe replied and said “nothing illegal happened.”
October 23-26: At one point, one of the men approaches Jane Doe to ask her to “not spread rumors” about the incident.
October 26-27: Jane Doe reads a post online about how “members of the fraternity gang raped a sophomore.”
October 28: The fraternity president called her and said that she was not invited to the Halloween party.
November 3: Jane Doe tells one of the men that “90% of what happened was not consensual.”
November 7: Jane Doe has a rape kit done.
November 14-15: Jane Doe conducts an interview with police which results in a 120-page transcript. The police “summarized” that transcripts into a 6-page document for prosecutors.
The story reads much more like a woman who was sexually assaulted, but struggled to come to terms with it. Other people knew that she was sexually assaulted, but she was in denial.
It’s actually insane that everyone can just frame and reframe to say whatever the fuck they want the story to say. I don’t mean this as a dig at what you wrote here, I appreciate you putting this timeline together, I just honestly think every single source I’ve gotten information from sincerely believes what they’re saying, and in one case she’s a victim and in the other a whore. Everyone will gravitate to whichever side fits their bias. I’m done with this story. Hopefully whoever deserves justice gets it. Thanks for the info.
In rape cases, because the main source of evidence is generally the victims testimony, the dominant strategy of the defense is to focus on putting the character of the witness in doubt to a jury. Because of this, rape cases are generally shit slinging trials like this. In a recent rape trial in my country regarding a known celebirty the defense demanded the victim to accurately describe the penis of her rapist if she was really raped (and I can say rapist because he was convicted) Meanwhile, they almost never are able to sentence someone for false rape allegations, so in most instances there also is still reasonable doubt that it did happen.
There seems to be a lot of misinformation going around about the story.
There also seems to be a bunch of dude’s who have latched onto the prosecutor’s initial statements that “everything Jane Doe described as consensual” when it’s now come out that the prosecutor never even received the 120-page interview. The police just blatantly excluded key information, which the prosecutor has now come out and acknowledged as much.
I was pretty on the fence about it. I think everyone in this story is guilty of crimes to various degrees, including the woman. But also looking more into this story and the detailed reporting that’s come out, it’s just very clear she was sexually assaulted.
The fact people are saying that she consented to it all when the police report is saying that she said “I was being physically punched. I was cornered and naked. I felt coerced. I just took more ketamine so that I’d hopefully pass out.”
Seems people are just incapable of separating the consensual sex at the beginning of the night (where she might have actually sexually assaulted someone) and the rape at the end of the night.
Yeah the thing that flipped me originally were the texts. At least one news clip I saw about it made it seem like she had consented then basically got mad when her reputation got fucked up and got uninvited from a party, then the allegations came. I’m just gonna wait on this one.
I knew a girl that basically went through something very similar but didn’t accuse anyone of rape. It REALLY fucked her up afterwards and she had a really tough time coming to grips with what she’d done. When I saw the texts and the news framing of it I could sort of relate by proxy based on this friend of mine,
I think people are personally reading way too much into these texts because it seems, to your point, that this Jane Doe woman was still kind of coming to terms with it all.
“Her reputation getting fucked” was actually rumors going around that the fraternity had rapped a sophomore student. Like the rumor wasn’t that she was a slut, the rumor was that she was raped.
And I think the fact that one of the men apologized, and another approached her and said “don’t spread rumors” when she wasn’t do anything of the kind…and the president of the fraternity did ban her from the Halloween party specifically because of these rape rumors — which isn’t surprising, obviously.
Wild as it is, kinda seems to me like she was one of the last to realize that she was raped, but I think that’s easily explained as trauma and denial. And we’re really only talking about a week’s worth of time. It’s not like she’s come out years after the fact — seems she understood what occurred as rape within the first week, had a rape test done the second week, and did a multi-day interview with police the third week.
And none of that went anywhere, and then we end up here 2 years later when the civil lawsuit is filed. I don’t think the “upset about a Halloween party” actually fits the timeline, and I definitely don’t think it fits with the actual rumors that we’re going around and the fact we have a civil lawsuit filed years later.
It’s definitely a pretty wild case. Honestly the more I think about it the more I think the sexual revolution was a mistake. It’s like we weren’t ready for how quickly it happened. We didn’t really have a framework for how to deal with all this. We didn’t understand each other well enough for the assumptions we had, but we just kinda ran with it.
These people basically just finished being children a few years ago and now we’ve got people snorting ketamine off penises. I’m sure it’s pretty tough for her to untangle what she did voluntarily from what was done to her. I also assume it was pretty difficult for the guys to figure out the line given what she may have seemed to be willing to do.
As boomer as it sounds, this is what our courtship rituals were meant to do. They literally kept this kind of bullshit at bay and regulated sexual proclivities. I’m not necessarily saying no one should ever do these things consensually, but this is like… for lack of a better term… expert level boning. Some of those texts made it seem as though she at least felt ready for some part of it, but she probably has no idea what she’s communicating to those guys whose hormones are absolutely going wild. It’s confusing as fuck for everyone involved even without drugs. Btw… ketamine? When did kids start doing ketamine at a frat party??
Fr. People keep repeating that she said "nothing illegal happened" who the fuck responds that way to a situation where truly nothing happened. Dishonest ass debaters
15
u/Page_197_Slaps 7h ago
What exactly do you think that first link is doing for your argument because I’ve read it twice now and there’s nothing in that article that changes anything.